One of the most significant discussions in finance and economics is about the predictability of stock market prices. The theories and hypotheses are many, but one concept that has grabbed considerable attention is the Random Walk Hypothesis.
The Random Walk Hypothesis is a financial theory suggesting that stock market prices evolve analogous to a random walk and, hence, cannot be predicted with any reliable degree of accuracy. The idea behind Random Walk Hypothesis is that the flow of information that affects the prices is unimpeded and random, so past prices can’t help predict future prices.
The term “random walk” means the changes in stock prices are random and past changes don’t influence the “up” or “down” movement in the next period. It’s akin to flipping a coin; each flip is independent of the previous one. The hypothesis here is that this random walk behaviour is an accurate description of real-world stock price changes.
The Random Walk Hypothesis is consistent with the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), which postulates that financial markets are always perfectly efficient, meaning the current stock prices always incorporate and reflect all relevant information.
Foundation of the Random Walk Hypothesis
The fundamental premise of the Random Walk Hypothesis is that when information flows freely, and market participants act rationally, the competition among them to buy or sell stocks should result in fair, unbiased prices. As such, any new information affecting a company’s value should be incorporated into the stock price immediately and accurately.
For example, if a company announces better-than-expected earnings, that information should instantly be reflected in the stock’s price. So, because every person has access to the same information simultaneously, no investor should be able to use that information to achieve consistently superior returns.
It’s also crucial to understand the term “drift” in the context of the Random Walk Hypothesis. The prices of securities are said to follow a random walk with a drift. This “drift” refers to the general long-term trend in the prices, such as the continued upward trend often observed in stock prices over the long term. However, short-term price changes are still considered to be random and unpredictable.
History of Random Walk Hypothesis
- Early days: The concept of random walks was initially applied to finance by French mathematician Louis Bachelier in 1900 in his doctoral thesis, ‘The Theory of Speculation’, where he observed that fluctuations of stock market prices could be modelled as a random walk.
- Paul Samuelson’s contribution: The concept gained traction in the mid-20th century with the work of American economist Paul Samuelson, a Nobel laureate, who applied random walk models to market prices and formulated mathematical theories around them. He argued that speculative price changes were statistically independent and followed a random walk, meaning past movements couldn’t predict future ones.
- Eugene Fama and the Efficient Market Hypothesis: In the 1960s, economist Eugene Fama, also a Nobel laureate and associated with the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, formulated the Efficient Market Hypothesis, which built upon the ideas of the Random Walk Hypothesis. According to the EMH, financial markets are “informationally efficient”, meaning current prices reflect all available information. This would suggest that consistently achieving above-average returns is impossible. Fama’s work brought the Random Walk Hypothesis into mainstream economic theory.
- Burton Malkiel’s influence: Economist Burton Malkiel popularized the Random Walk Hypothesis with his 1973 book, ‘A Random Walk Down Wall Street’. The book argued that a “buy-and-hold” strategy often yields superior results than trying to time the market, a strategy in line with the Random Walk Hypothesis.
- Current views: In the decades since Malkiel’s book, the Random Walk Hypothesis has been both supported and challenged. Studies have shown patterns in stock market data that contradict a strict interpretation of the hypothesis, and behavioural finance theories highlight how human behaviour can lead to price changes that don’t fit the random walk model. However, the Random Walk Hypothesis continues to influence economic theory and practice significantly.
In summary, while the Random Walk Hypothesis has its roots in early 20th-century financial observations, it gained traction and influence throughout the 20th century.
Relevance of Random Walk Hypothesis today
Random Walk Hypothesis continues to hold a significant influence in the financial world. Many financial advisors and commentators regularly advocate for passive investing strategies based on the theory’s implications.
Empirically, while there is a great deal of evidence both for and against the hypothesis, it is widely agreed upon that stock prices are challenging to predict in the short term. As a result, many investors choose strategies that align with the principles of the Random Walk Hypothesis, even if they don’t believe in the hypothesis fully.
Moreover, the hypothesis provides a valuable baseline model. It serves as a benchmark against which one can test market anomalies and potential inefficiencies.
- An introduction to Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT)
- Myths about Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT)
- Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH)
- Risk-adjusted returns
- Relevance of covariance and correlation in portfolio construction
- An introduction to reversion to the mean
QuietGrowth has been publishing content in this blog or in other sections of the website. Contributors for this content may include the employees of QuietGrowth, or third-party firms, or third-party authors. Unless otherwise noted, such content does not necessarily represent the actual views or opinions of QuietGrowth or any of its employees, directors, or officers.
Any links provided in our website to other websites are for the purpose of convenience, or as required by any such other websites. Unless otherwise noted, this does not imply that QuietGrowth endorses, is affiliated, and/or promotes any information, or products or services of those websites. Please read the advice disclaimer section of the website too.